Those who want you to doubt that anarchy (self ownership and individual responsibility) is the best, most moral, and ethical way to live among others are asking you to accept that theft, aggression, superstition, and slavery are perhaps better.

5 comments:

It is interesting to note that the early Christian leaders and writers were totally against agression against anyone even in self defense. Then Emperor Constitine co-opted the Christian movement and going to war and killing as a Christian became just fine. Constitine, by the way, did not convert to Christianity until he was on his death bed. I wrote about this here: http://logicversusemotion.blogspot.com/2012/01/few-of-reasons-why-im-not-christian.html

I am completely sickened by "Christians" who worship the military and the State. Just moments ago on facebook I saw an example of that.

I can't be a Christian because I see absolutely no evidence (or even suggestions of evidence) that anything supernatural exists. But I could sympathize with (the currently State-worshiping) Christians if they'd drop their second god like the slimy turd it is.

Speaking as a pastor ( I pastor a small church in Iowa) part of the problem is that churches and mainstream Christianity receive many benefits from the government, and at least until the last 10-15 years had very privileged position with lots of influence (on the state) to guide various "morality" laws. Thus it served their self-interests to glorify the state.

Now that they are losing those privileges, some churches and Christians are becoming very sorry they shared the bed with the state - it was all fine when the state was giving privilege, but now when the state is restricting liberties or removing privilege, or waging nearly endless wars, some Christians are realizing their adulterous relationship with those whose real agenda is control was maybe not the best idea. Unfortunately they are already enslaved and will likely not break free from the thinking that the state is the answer; how many times have I heard, "If we just elect the right..." then everything would be better (oh how wrong to think government is the answer...). Never will you hear that preached from my pulpit while I am on watch - I often remind people in my church who say something to the effect, "We need a law..." that when they want to remove someone else's freedom today, they better not be shocked when they lose their freedom tomorrow.

zOrv- Back when I first set up my first webpage, it included this: "Any government powerful enough to 'promote' your religion today, is powerful enough to prohibit your religion tomorrow."And my current page still does.

Kent - fewer things could be truer than that! People seem to forget that freedom of religion also means freedom for OTHERS, even those who want no part of any faith group. If we are to be free people coercion of any form by outside entities (government, churches, whatever) must be avoided and opposed.

One of the original principles of my group (a type of Baptists) was what is called "soul liberty." It is the idea that every person has the God given freedom to make their own decisions about God, faith, no faith, no God, whatever. Reason, debate and persuasion (in the classical rhetorical sense, not the "gun to your head" sense) were fine, but no one was ever to be coerced to follow our way or beliefs. Unfortunately, many have forgotten that, and would prefer legislation and coercion, which the statist loves.